Contract Law: Analysis of Case Study

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer
tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
Contract Law
Analysis of Case Study
01-Apr-18
(Student Details: )
(Word Count: 1720)

Contract Law
Meghan
The main issue of this case revolves around a possible contract being drawn between Kate and
Meghan based on the facts provided in the case study.
A contract shows a promise undertaken in a legally binding agreement, where each party
promises something, be it payment of consideration, or undertaking the act as has been promised.
In order to create any contract, there is a need for different elements to be present in the contract.
These include offer, acceptance, consideration, intention, legality and consent1. Consideration is
the value which is paid by one of the contracting parties, to the other party, for the other party
carrying on the performance of act covered under the contract2. The value of consideration can
be anything which is mutually decided between the parties, but it is important that the
consideration has economic value in the eyes of law as per Thomas v Thomas3.
Another important rule which relates to consideration is that it has to be present and cannot be
past. In Re McArdle4, a wife lived with her three grown up children in a house. One of the
children’s wives had undertaken some work and the children promised to give her a payment of
£488, for which a document was signed to give effect to this transaction. However, the court held
that the promise had been unenforceable as the work had been undertaken before promise had
been made, resulting in the contract having inadequate consideration owing to presence of past
consideration.
1 Neil Andrews, Contract Law (Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed, 2015)
2 Andy Gibson and Douglas Fraser, Business Law (Pearson Higher Education AU, 2013)
3 (1842) 2 QB 851
4 (1951) Ch 669
Page 2

Contract Law
In the present case study, the contract formation of Kate and Meghan revolve around this very
aspect of elements of contract. In this matter, Meghan had told Kate that she would give her the
painting for the free tutoring which Kate had given to Meghan in the past for etiquette, finishing
and deportment lessons. Thomas v Thomas would make this consideration value having
economic value as tutoring costs money. However, this is the case of past consideration, which
based on Re McArdle would make the consideration value in invalid consideration.
Thus, on the basis of this discussion, it can be concluded that a contract was not formed between
Kate and Meghan owing to the lack of element of consideration. This means that Kate cannot sue
Meghan for giving her the painting and for getting it delivered to her on Wednesday March 12th.
Will
The main issue of this case revolves around a possible contract being drawn between Kate and
Will based on the facts provided in the case study.
The first step in formation of any contract is for one party to offer certain terms to another party
in a clear and express manner, which becomes the offer of the case. It is important to make the
difference clear between an offer and an invitation to treat5. When it comes to invitation to treat,
the inviting party is not obliged to sell the products for which invitation has been made as was
established through Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots6. Partridge v Critenden7
dictates that that the advertisements which are put in the newspapers are invitation to treat.
However, there are cases where these can be deemed as offer, where the unilateral offer is based,
5 Jill Poole, Casebook on Contract Law (Oxford University Press, 2016)
6 [1953] 1 QB 401
7 (1968) 2 All ER 425
Page 3